Search Forums

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Why is Pedophilia Categorized as a Disorder?

Originally Posted by evensaul

Because that is what the APA is doing to define a mental disorder. Read post #1.

And I already explained how it's not hanging on only the legal definition, but also general ethical principles common to most societies. The fact that there's a point about someone able to give legal consent only indicates that the principle behind both is the same: someone younger than what our society determines is the age of consent is not able to give consent, and therefore someone who has sexual desires towards them is considered by our society to have a disorder. If our society determined a different age based on a change in our ethical principles, then the result would be that both the law and the definition would change. So again, it's not "hanging" on the law - it's a simple expression of what our society determines to be ethical conduct when considering a person's ability to consent to things at different ages.

Originally Posted by evensaul

Again, what if there is no act, and the pedophile does not believe he would cause distress or injury? Why should that person be categorized as having a mental disorder?

Because having people walking around sexualising children is not something our society wants to happen. Again, just ask yourself: do you think it's good for a society to have individuals who sexualize children and have sexual desires towards children? Would you feel comfortable if you had a child and found out that someone around them is thinking about them sexually - even if you had the guarantee that they'd never act on that desire (which there isn't)?

Further, the fact that the paedophile doesn't act is an admission that they at least understand that the society they are in doesn't see their desire as something acceptable, and also an understanding of why that is. This comports with the first bullet-point of the APA's definition. Further, their irrational disagreement with, or inability to understand the fact that acting on their desire would cause distress or injury is, to most people, enough to classify them as having a disorder.

Originally Posted by evensaul

Don't you think that psychiatric evaluations and classifications should be independent of what the law says?

They are.

Originally Posted by evensaul

The problem is that according to logic you agree with, the person didn't have a mental disorder while in the US, and then suddenly does at the conclusion of the flight. If that makes sense to you, then tell me why you're okay with that.

Again, I'm not saying that "the person didn't have a mental disorder while in the US, and then suddenly does". I'm saying that the person is classified differently as having a mental disorder or not by different societies. The fact that the person is travelling doesn't matter, since they were already classified as having a disorder before entering the location which classified them as such. It's really simple: different places have different societies and, as a result, different views on how to classify people based on their proclivities. This is not a problem.

Do you have an issue with different places having different laws on when a person is considered an adult? Now you're here, and you're an adult, but then you go there, and you're no longer an adult! Oh noes!

Originally Posted by evensaul

Okay, you got me there. Well done. So let's change it to a few beers before driving home. I want to go out with friends, have some drinks, and drive myself home. I really like the feeling of being inebriated, and the social fun that goes with it. I'm not an alcoholic, but I enjoy a good time. I'd drink enough to be over the legal limit and the law says I would be a danger to other people. I don't think I would be a danger to others because I drive real well under the influence of alcohol, but I decide not to go out because I don't want to get arrested. Does all that mean that I have a mental disorder? If yes, explain. If not, why not?

Your desire to drink enough to feel good and still be able to drive according to you is probably not in the same category as what we're discussing here. For one, many people probably share your opinion, so already theres a big difference with regard to the first bullet-point. Also, I'd point out that, with your example, the desire itself is quite different, as there are varying degrees of desire. Something like wanting to have a good time in the specific way that you describe is definitely not on the same scale as the sexual desire a paedophile has towards children. What you describe is more in the range of opinion than an actual urge.

Originally Posted by evensaul

The latter. I'm talking about someone who does NOT think it is a bad thing and doesn't think he would be causing harm, but chooses not to act.

Again, choosing not to act is an admission of understanding that it's an issue if they were to act, and therefore also an understanding of the ethical reasons behind why it's an issue, regardless of whether they agree with the ethics.

Depending on the level of distress as described by the first bullet-point, he may not be doing that okay.

Originally Posted by evensaul

A problem? Maybe. A mental disorder? No. We all really want to do things we just can't do because of the risks involved. I really want to drive 150mph, skydive and experience what its like to get away with a major jewel heist, but those are all pretty darn risky. Do any of those indicate a mental disorder? I don't think so.

Again, varying degrees of desire. You say you have the desire to skydive. But is that really the same as a paedophile's desire to have sex with children? Do you think about it every time you see an airplane?

Originally Posted by evensaul

I think it would be a lot more interesting to talk about the deeper societal/moral considerations in play when categorizing people as having mental disorders, like you mentioned earlier.

I don't. Our society is pretty clear on what it considers acceptable, and our medical professionals appear to be doing their best to adhere to those ethical principles. This is why I see no issue with how they've defined paraphillic disorder, and your objections don't have sufficient justification for me to conclude that there is an issue.

Re: Why is Pedophilia Categorized as a Disorder?

Originally Posted by evensaul

Definition of PEDOPHILIA
:sexual perversion in which children are the preferred sexual object; specifically :a psychiatric disorder in which an adult has sexual fantasies about or engages in sexual acts with a prepubescent childhttps://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pedophilia

The American Psychiatric Association defines a paraphillic disorder as a condition in which people

•feel personal distress about their interest, not merely distress resulting from society’s disapproval;
or
•have a sexual desire or behavior that involves another person’s psychological distress, injury, or
death, or a desire for sexual behaviors involving unwilling persons or persons unable to give legal
consent.

The above means that a big group of people, pedophiles, are being categorized as having a mental disorder based on legal guidelines regarding the legal age of consent. If homosexual orientation is not a choice (but rather a normal aspect of human sexuality), and pedophilia is not a choice, shouldn't they be treated the same by the APA? Going further, why shouldn't necrophilia and zoophilia be recognized as simple variants of sexuality rather than as mental disorders? Legal restrictions shouldn't influence whether a certain sexual orientation is considered normal or a mental disorder.

What am I missing?

I once asked a psychiatrist to explain the difference, and here is what he told me:

Pedophilia actually has nothing to do with sexuality and sexual orientation. A pedophile is not actually attracted to children, rather he or she is obsessed with what children represent, which is the innocence of youth. They feel distress (and please note that it clearly states that said distress is not merely a result of society's disapproval) because acting upon their desire removes that innocence from the child, transforming the object of their obsession. Also, a pedophile desires unwilling participation from their target, meaning they enjoy the domination of another's will. We also see this in rape cases, where sex is only the tool in dominating another person.

This is the distinction between this mental disorder and sexual orientation.

It is not our abilities in life that show who we truly are; it is our choices. Albus Dumbledore in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

Re: Why is Pedophilia Categorized as a Disorder?

Originally Posted by ladykrimson

I once asked a psychiatrist to explain the difference, and here is what he told me:

Pedophilia actually has nothing to do with sexuality and sexual orientation. A pedophile is not actually attracted to children, rather he or she is obsessed with what children represent, which is the innocence of youth. They feel distress (and please note that it clearly states that said distress is not merely a result of society's disapproval) because acting upon their desire removes that innocence from the child, transforming the object of their obsession. Also, a pedophile desires unwilling participation from their target, meaning they enjoy the domination of another's will. We also see this in rape cases, where sex is only the tool in dominating another person.

This is the distinction between this mental disorder and sexual orientation.

So then, what is it called if a person has a sexual attraction to "willing" children? If said person is not trying to "dominate" or otherwise "harm" the child, but just wants to be close to a child in the "same way" as with an adult?
As long as you are trying to have a nurturing and caring relationship with the child, it is "sexual orientation"?

Re: Why is Pedophilia Categorized as a Disorder?

Though legally children can not consent (or be willing) to have sex with an ADULT. Children willingly have sex all the time. Engaged in it myself when I was 16, with another 16 yr old. "No harm, no foul" that I'm aware of...

Re: Why is Pedophilia Categorized as a Disorder?

Originally Posted by futureboy

Again, I'm not saying that "the person didn't have a mental disorder while in the US, and then suddenly does". I'm saying that the person is classified differently as having a mental disorder or not by different societies. The fact that the person is travelling doesn't matter, since they were already classified as having a disorder before entering the location which classified them as such. It's really simple: different places have different societies and, as a result, different views on how to classify people based on their proclivities. This is not a problem.

Do you have an issue with different places having different laws on when a person is considered an adult? Now you're here, and you're an adult, but then you go there, and you're no longer an adult! Oh noes!

So, if the people of one country decide there is nothing wrong with pedophilia, then it would not be illegal and would not be a mental disorder in that country. Zactly right.

"If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth." - Ronald Reagan

Re: Why is Pedophilia Categorized as a Disorder?

Originally Posted by Belthazor

Though legally children can not consent (or be willing) to have sex with an ADULT. Children willingly have sex all the time. Engaged in it myself when I was 16, with another 16 yr old. "No harm, no foul" that I'm aware of...

A child is pre-pubescent so you weren't a child at 16. Pre-pubescent children cannot give consent and likewise it's the attraction to the pre-pubescent that defines one as a pedophile.

While it is typically illegal for an adult to have sex with a 16-year-old, it's not technically pedophilia.

Re: Why is Pedophilia Categorized as a Disorder?

Originally Posted by Belthazor

So then, what is it called if a person has a sexual attraction to "willing" children? If said person is not trying to "dominate" or otherwise "harm" the child, but just wants to be close to a child in the "same way" as with an adult?
As long as you are trying to have a nurturing and caring relationship with the child, it is "sexual orientation"?

Said person is not really attracted to the child. Said person is attracted to what the child represents. Once the child reaches maturity, said person will no longer be "attracted" to the child. That is not a "meaningful relationship."

It is not our abilities in life that show who we truly are; it is our choices. Albus Dumbledore in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

Said person is not really attracted to the child. Said person is attracted to what the child represents. Once the child reaches maturity, said person will no longer be "attracted" to the child. That is not a "meaningful relationship."

Though I understand your point and agree in general, how do we know that EVERY person that was attracted to a child would abandon them as they grew up?

Re: Why is Pedophilia Categorized as a Disorder?

So, if the people of one country decide there is nothing wrong with pedophilia, then it would not be illegal and would not be a mental disorder in that country. Zactly right.

I'm not sure what your point is here. You do realize that, in some places, they don't consider the same actions to be illegal in the same way as we do, right? Are you trying to say that a society which doesn't see paedophilia as a disorder nor have laws against it would be better?

Re: Why is Pedophilia Categorized as a Disorder?

Originally Posted by futureboy

You do realize that, in some places, they don't consider the same actions to be illegal in the same way as we do, right?

Exactly right, future. Cultural norms and their resulting laws vary quite a bit over time and by geography. It is human nature for psychiatrists to label certain behaviors as normal or abnormal in a reflection of those cultural norms. The APA has been influenced by homosexual activism and changing public opinion to accept homosexuality as normal sexual variant rather than a mental disorder. Our legal system views pedophiles as criminals because society has not accepted them as having an acceptable sexual orientation, and the APA has fallen in line to support that societal condemnation. Rather than being an independent authority on psychiatric issues, the APA has become a mouthpiece for conventional wisdom. Pedophilia and homosexuality, along with other sexual variants, should be treated equally by the APA without consideration for cultural norms or their resulting laws affecting sexual orientation. If homosexuality is not a mental disorder, then neither is Pedophilia.

"If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth." - Ronald Reagan

Re: Why is Pedophilia Categorized as a Disorder?

Originally Posted by evensaul

The APA has been influenced by homosexual activism and changing public opinion to accept homosexuality as normal sexual variant rather than a mental disorder.

This is absolutely false. The APA was not influenced by changes in public opinion to change its classification of homosexuality, the classification was changed as a result of numerous studies and a vast amount of empirical data.

Originally Posted by evensaul

Our legal system views pedophiles as criminals because society has not accepted them as having an acceptable sexual orientation

Wrong again. The reasoning behind why it's illegal and why society doesn't accept it is the evidence supporting the conclusions being reached about it.

Originally Posted by evensaul

If homosexuality is not a mental disorder, then neither is Pedophilia.

Sure thing dude, have fun with that insane mess of a belief. But I think you'll find that the APA quite clearly classifies paedophilia as a disorder, and homosexuality clearly as not a disorder.

Re: Why is Pedophilia Categorized as a Disorder?

Essentially, APA classifies homosexuality as a normal sexual variant if the homosexual is not mentally distressed with that sexuality. But APA classifies pedophelia as a mental disorder because of possible conflicts with our legal system. That application of a double standard is flawed. The two should be treated the same, one way or the other.

"If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth." - Ronald Reagan

Re: Why is Pedophilia Categorized as a Disorder?

Originally Posted by evensaul

Essentially, APA classifies homosexuality as a normal sexual variant if the homosexual is not mentally distressed with that sexuality. But APA classifies pedophelia as a mental disorder because of possible conflicts with our legal system. That application of a double standard is flawed. The two should be treated the same, one way or the other.

I don't know how many times this needs to be pointed out but the difference between homosexuality and pedophilia is the idea of consent between two parties to interact in an informed and educated manner. Obviously children don't possess the experience to understand what is being done to them, they're physically weaker and intellectually unequipped to fight or understand they are being abused. We know this because we have many stories of children that have been repeatedly raped and abused as children; their experiences are widely documented and very public.

We also know that homosexual acts between two consenting adults does no harm outside of their activities and is certainly no worse than imagining a sexual act between two unattractive heterosexuals.

That they should be treated the same way ignores that one act is among equals and the other isn't. One act requires consent and the other doesn't. One act has provably harmed people, the other doesn't. One act has one party that doesn't want to participate, the other has two willing actors.

So I hope it is clear why one sexual act is a mental disorder where a disparity of power is forced upon a child, the obvious cries of distress and pain are ignored, and that the same deviant needs to plot and scheme and threaten in order to continue satisfying his urges. It's sadism, sociopathic, and evil all rolled into one. If that's not a textbook deviancy, I don't know what is.

And I challenge you to prove that homosexuals have any of the same qualities as a pedophile.

Frankly, it should be obvious there's no double standard and to impose your personal world view onto a harmless class of people is kinda reprehensible. If you don't like homosexuality then don't engage in it but also don't malign a whole group of people just because they have different sexual preferences.

Re: Why is Pedophilia Categorized as a Disorder?

Originally Posted by SharmaK

I don't know how many times this needs to be pointed out but the difference between homosexuality and pedophilia is the idea of consent between two parties...

Consent is irrelevant if a pedophile swears off any interaction with children. The celibate pedophile may have no emotional problems related to the sexual orientation or the celibacy, absolutely no mental anguish or discomfort or any kind of problem whatsoever, and yet be labeled as mentally ill. That is just not logical.

"If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth." - Ronald Reagan

Re: Why is Pedophilia Categorized as a Disorder?

Originally Posted by evensaul

Consent is irrelevant if a pedophile swears off any interaction with children. The celibate pedophile may have no emotional problems related to the sexual orientation or the celibacy, absolutely no mental anguish or discomfort or any kind of problem whatsoever, and yet be labeled as mentally ill. That is just not logical.

Given your argument, then it is actually OK for someone to animate pedophile pornography: there's no child ever harmed, and indeed the child could be made to consent to all sorts of heinous acts. Or worse, VR pedophila. Are you morally OK with that since there isn't a single real child involved but just the sick imagination from a pedophile?

Consent, actually informed consent, is always relevant. It's what distinguishes a moral right from a moral wrong in this case. And a child can never give informed consent and so any scenario where this can be made to happen is wrong.

You really need to apologize for your statements. I don't know if there are any gay members here but, without coming off as an SJW, it's an offensive comparison that you've made with no justification other than your own personal distaste of both orientations. And even then, do you really feel the same emotionally about two gay men having sex as you do with an adult and a child?